Who has ever given Creation a Chance?

Question

I really want unbiased, non-sarcastic answers. No bashing either side please. What I have observed, based on looking at the internet, is that either side can come up with a good answer (evolution vs. creation). Evoloutionists argue that theory basically means: fact. Creationists basically only have faith (when it comes right down to it). I dont want to know any "evidence" as an answer. I have met plenty of highly educated Christians that used to believe evolution as fact. I never met an evolutionist who has ever given creationism a chance. They only respond with insults and say "do your research" "get an education". Then evolutionist say that Christians are closed minded. Where are the open minded evolutionists who have given creation a second thought?

Answer 1

The truth of the matter is many, or even most, people have never examined both sides of this issue.

There is evidence for both views, but I believe when the total evidence is considered, it points to God as being the creator.

There is fossil evidence that shows men did not come millions of years after dinosaurs, and there are records left behind by ancient men that show their co-existence with dinosaurs. Many evolutionists deny that these exist. Many have never heard of or seen this data.

On the other-hand, many creationists are afraid to look at the "evidence" evolutionists offer.

The fear on both sides is that there may be something that shows the view held may be wrong. Sometimes this fear can be traced back to money. If someone makes his living being an "expert" on this subject, he cannot afford for people to doubt his doctrine. If people doubt you are right, they will not follow, so many teachers only show one side of the evidence.

Also, many people make up their mind, and then look for evidence that supports that view. Anything that disagrees with that prejudice is rejected. We should let the evidence change our mind, we often let our pre-conceived ideas change the evidence.

Answer 2

Not to be rude but almost everything you said is wrong. This isn't some sort of close call. Frankly I can't think of an issue that could possibly be less evenly balanced.

If by creationism you mean all the current species created just as they are at the beginning of life, then there's no evidence whatsoever. The book of Genesis by authors unknown is not evidence. I have books that say Superman went so fast he made time go backwards but I would not present that as evidence of time going backward.

On the other hand there is a stack of evidence that's been accumulating for roughly 4 billion years that one species gives rise to another, that there is a slow and steady extinction of species and new species coming into existence as well as periodic dramatic extinctions and repopulation of the earth.

One source of confusion is that evolution answers the question "how did all the different species come to be" but it does not answer the question "how did non-living material come together to form living material". Life is all about organic chemistry. It's all those wonderfully complex molecules built around the carbon atom that give us the proteins, carbohydrates, fats, etc. from which bodies are formed. So if you are a die-hard theist who wants a straw to continue to hang on to, that's about all you have left, although there's really no reason to have to resort to the supernatural to explain the beginning of life. And soon enough. quite probably in this century, scientists will create life in the laboratory using matter and energy known to have been available on earth. Then that straw too will be gone.

Like most creationists you are misusing the word theory. A theory is not a guess. A theory is an integrated explanation for how something works. It's not less than a fact. It is much more than a fact. It ties many facts together and gives them structure. It enables us to predict things where we have not yet seen examples yet. Using the theory of gravity for example, I could predict how long it will take a ball of given weight to fall a given distance, what it's speed will be when it hits the ground, etc. If you had a piano supended high over your head and someone was about to cut the rope I bet you wouldn't just stand there and watch because the theory of gravity might be wrong. The theory as it was left by Darwin and his peers offered incredible insights but much work has been done in evolutionary biology. You could fill a library with the information on predator/prey relationships, sexual selection, the effect of isolation on a species, highly specialized social groups, species getting larger or smaller in response to environmental changes, embryonic development, specific extinct species, how behavioral changes can drive physical changes, the role of geology and climate change, etc. etc. etc.

While the fossil record is very small compared to the incredible number of species (or even more so the incredible number of individual organisms) that have lived and died in the past 4 billion or so years, it is remarkable to see how clearly certain patterns develop when they are dated and arranged chronologically.

And then in the 20th century comes the icing on the cake - DNA. Now we not only understand by metaphor and analogy how evolution works, we know what the physical mechanism is that drives it all. Before that we knew by observation that offspring are very similar to their parents, but we didn't know why that had to be. Now we know.

The real shame here is not just that a philosophy built on lies is inherently flawed or that creationism leads to poor policy decisons but that creationists are missing out on the greatest true story ever. All animals alive today have a common ancestry. We are cousins not just with gorilla but with the bear and the wolf and the elephant and the bat and the whale. While creationsist might choose to ignore the truth and perpetuate the fantasy of god's magic wand it is not acceptable that they pretend for a moment that there is any evidence whatsoever for that ridiculous stance.

Creationism belongs on the scrap heap of history with flat earth theory and the sun seen as a chariot of fire. Science has already put it there and if that makes you feel like the way you spend your Sunday mornings is just silly, then perhaps you should reconsider your weekly schedule rather than trying to wish away evolution.

Answer 3

Why would I ever give creation theory (not even really a theory How about myth) a chance? In order for me to accept something as fact I must be shown at least some little tiny shred of evidence. Evolution is a proven fact that is still going on to this day. Mixing science w/ religion is for people that have just given up. There is no plausible evidence for creation & it is only a matter of time before we do figure out how life really started and I am not even close to being open minded to Fairy tales I gave that up when I was a child

Answer 4

I don't belive in creationism, however, the whole issue isn't a matter of giving creation a chance. Evolution is a hell of a lot more unlikely; the mutations are billions to one chances, and there is ton of life surviving on our planet, whereas an omnipotent beign would account for everyhting preety easily. The reason creationsim isn't taught in science class, is because it isn't based on the scientific method. Most likely evolution will be updated adn will evolve itslef many more times in the future, while creationism will stay strong, but evolution is based on testing and hypothesing, and creationsim is based on hoping. One is science, the other is religion. As a non creationist, I do think that cretionism is possible, however it is not scientific, and beliving in it doesn't help me personally, so i don't. Plus, theres a simple enough way to find out, and were all headed towards it

Answer 5

I believe that God was the big bang and then evolution took over. For there to have only been Adam and Eve at one time on this planet makes no sense. How could Cain have found a wife in Nod? When I see people that actually think that the world is 6000 years old I am just flabergasted that anyone could be so ignorant. Doesn't common sense mean anything to those people?

I recently read that the National Park Service is not allowd to say the real age of the Grand Canyon. How ridiculous is that? We are supposed to have respect for such ignorance?

There is mountains of physical evidence that can be seen and touched to support evolution. There is not one single shred of evidence to support Adam and Eve or any great flood. Does anyone really believe that God is capable of flooding the whole earth because He got pissed off? Come on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Answer 6

Tell me, have you ever given the Hindi story of creation a chance? Do you believe in Vishnu?

How about the egyptian creation myth that says we are all products of divine semen?

The reason scientists and "evolutionists" don't give credit to creation is because it has ZERO credibility as a scientific or rational explanation.

Besides all scientific discoveries contradict a 6 day creation. Do you have any scientific evidence for creation? We would all love to see it.

Ohh, btw, the process of evolution is a fact. The Theory of Evolution describes the process itself, just like the General Theory of Relativity explains gravity. You wouldn't argue gravity is "just a theory" would you?

Answer 7

I gave it a chance. I've thought about it, and wondered if it could pe possible. It showed itself to be no different than a hundred other creation myths, completely lacking in evidence, and unable to withstand scrutiny. I read a really good book once about a comet that struck the Earth in 1998 and destroyed all of civilization. When I went outside, civilization was still there. Should I have tried harder to believe that book, or is it obvious that I was reading a fictional story?

Answer 8

I hate to break it to you but Creationism requires a biased opinion to begin with.

If I didn't have belief in the judeo-Christian(-Islamic) God then I wouldn't have a problem with believing in the Creation story according to those religions.

It is only someone who is unbiased by their religion that can take a non-religious standpoint in the dilemma and look at both sides. Someone who truly believes that God exists can not have an unbiased opinion, just the same as someone who does not believe in God cannot.

Answer 9

I'm an atheist who was a christian. I have studied both sides of the issue and there are tons of evidence to support evolution. There is no physical evidence to support creation. I have to go with what I can physically see.

Answer 10

Actually, alot of "evolutionists" used to believe in creation and Adam and Eve and the serpent - when they were children. As they learned things, they realized it wasn't true, just like dozens of other fictional stories they used to believe.